When comparing Godot vs Esenthel, the Slant community recommends Godot for most people. In the question“What are the best 3D game engines?” Godot is ranked 3rd while Esenthel is ranked 10th. The most important reason people chose Godot is:
Every property can be animated.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Integrated animation editor
Every property can be animated.
Pro Unified game editor interface
All the game developing work is done inside one program: the engine editor. This feature is something only high end engines have. Even the scripting is done in the same program. No need for Eclipse or other front end editors.
Pro Built-in physics
Add physics to 2D and 3D scenes, through rigid and static bodies, characters, raycasts, vehicles and more.
Pro Fully dedicated 2D engine, no hacks
Godot has a mature 2D engine with many features used by modern 2D games.
Pro Can be deployed to multiple platforms
Deploy games to desktops (Windows/OS X/Linux), smartphones (iOS/Android/BlackBerry), and the web (HTML5 via Emscripten).
Pro Under constant development
This engine barely released one year ago has more than 1000 forks on github and about 100 developers. Not only that just a bit of browsing trough issues you will quickly find out the dev community loves new esp free technology and does not shy away from completely rewriting parts of the engine. The audio engine is being completely rewritten to use threads and so forth.
Pro Free and open source
Godot is licensed under MIT license. Anyone can grab the source from https://github.com/godotengine/godot, and compile the engine themselves.
Pro Instancing and node concept makes sense
The node and the instancing concept work very well and helps developers to structure content efficiently.
Pro Easy to learn scripting language
It can be used to add custom behaviors to any object by extending it with scripting, using the built-in editor with syntax highlighting and code completion.
A built-in debugger with breakpoints and stepping can be used and graphs for possible bottlenecks can be checked.
Pro Editor and runtime are fully cross-platform
You can run Godot on all 3 major operating systems (Windows/Mac/Linux) and build your game to all available platforms from each without any platform-specific work needed. All platforms including Linux are supported first class.
The executable is portable and less than 40 MB in size.
Pro Fun to use
An important aspect that can't be grasped without using the engine for a few days. The Interface is evolving nicely and making games is just fun.
Pro User friendly UI for all your team
Non-programmers (musicians, artists, etc) can join the development easily.
Pro The list of supported languages is growing
Officially, Godot supported languages for now will be GDScript, C#(Mono), VisualScript and C++.
Pro Drag & drop interface
Many parts of the editor allow you to drag & drop, which makes working with assets and scene trees a joy.
Pro Internationalization of the editor
You can change the language shown in menus. Godot translations: https://hosted.weblate.org/projects/godot-engine/godot/
Pro Friendly towards Version Control Systems
The engine is build not only to support version control but to really use it. Scene files for example which usually get compiled into some sort of unreadable data stay in a text format - that way you can actually see your changes in a version control system like Git.
Pro Really good community
The community is great and really cares about the engine. It is easy to get help and to be part of Godot's future.
Pro Quicker development by using the integrated code editor
Esenthel has a built-in code editor which drastically simplifies the programming process.
Programming with Esenthel is based on C++, however, when using the code editor there's no need to make separate .cpp or .h files. Code can be written once and the editor will be separating definitions and declarations automatically in the background allowing for quicker development.
Pro Can be easily extended
Built in pure C++ so it is easy to use and extend however needed.
Pro Engine issues are resolved quickly
The author is very device minded and able to handle any problem quickly and effectively and he has a good track record of listening to requests.
Pro Incredibly stable
The engine is rock solid and stable which, considering its extensive feature set, is a huge plus for game developers
Pro Helpful and responsive forum
Pro Constant development and progress
New features or update to features are provided monthly.
Pro Can import a wide variety of formats
- 3D - FBX, DAE, OBJ, 3DS, B3D, MS3D, BVH, ASE, PSK/PSA
- 2D - BMP, PNG, JPG, TGA, DDS, TIF, WEBP, PSD, ICO
- Videos - VP9, Theora
- Sounds - OGG, WAV, MP3 (once decoding patents expire)
Pro Available on Steam
Pro Can be used for collaborative development
Esenthel comes with tools allowing for multiple developers to work on one project at the same time in collaborative mode. Every change made is instantly visible by other team members.
Pro Attractive licensing
Free to try, with license as cheap as 9.50$/month (with yearly subscription), 11.40$/month (monthly subscription) or full source code license 228$/year.
Pro Access to full source code
Having easy access to the full source makes it possible for any skilled developer to add features that a project requires.
Pro Good support for Android and iOS
Android and iOS support is pretty stable and easy to develop on. It's possible to, for example, develop the entire game on Windows or Mac and then easily compile for Android and iOS.
Pro Rock solid
Pro Supports modern graphics and sound APIs
- Graphics - DirectX 9/10/11, OpenGL, OpenGL ES, WebGL
- Sound - DirectSound, OpenAL, OpenSL
Pro Oculus Rift native support
Oculus Rift API integrated into the engine platform.
Pro Supports multiple compression libraries
LZMA, LZHAM, LZ4, ZLIB, Snappy, RLE
Pro Supports in-app purchases
IAP support for both mobile and desktop devices.
Con Tileset management could be more efficient
The tileset creation and management is lacking common features found in more developed tileset managers. However, it features support for Tiled - the only downside being that it is an external program.
Con No built-in way to import atlases
Godot does not have an easy and automatic way to import atlases created by other tools. However, there are plugins that can be used to import atlases from other engines.
Con Very bad documentation
The documentation is poorly written, and has very few examples of real application and even fewer design guidelines about how to program a game in the engine.
Con 2DPhysics is weak compared to Box2d
Box2d has much more features.
Con NoAdmob or other AdNetwork support
Godot has no native support for implementing advertisements into your game.
Con OSX app is a mess
Instead of one contained folder/file with an icon per normal it is a mess of files which is not at all suitable or distributable without further work after every compilation.
Con Difficult to optimize
Godot has an OOP architecture. Everything is an object internally and data is spread among many classes, thus it's difficult to optimize (i.e. not cache friendly, difficuly to vectorize or paralellize, etc).
Read about "Data Oriented Design" for more info about the problems and solutions.
Con Hard for a Unity user
Coming from a Unity background, Godot engine is hard.
Con Slow roadmap implementation
Bugs are fixed promptly, but the developer maintains a growing 'roadmap' of features with no indication to users of time frame and priority of feature implementation.
Con One-man developer
Although the complete engine is maintained by a single, highly-skilled individual, he can be limited to what he is able to see or perceive, and sometimes he doesn't recognize broken or incomplete features until he sees it firsthand and sometimes doesn't recognize valid reports from his users. But when he does recognize the gap in the engine's feature-set, he is quick to make adjustments and updates.
Con Lack of in-depth tutorials
There are plenty of beginner coding tutorials which serve as a basic introduction for a new user to get up to speed, but once having passed that stage there is a real lack of free more advanced tutorials/examples/code snippets demonstrating the finer details of the vast and varied API functions.
Con Lack of editing tools
Con Web support practically non-existing